Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T01:49:53.390Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Further studies on the effects of plant density, spatial arrangement and time of harvest on yield and root size in carrots

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

P. J. Salter ,
I. B. Currah  and
Jane R. Fellows
P. J. Salter
Affiliation:
National Vegetable Research Station, Wellesbourne, Warwick, CV35 9EF
I. B. Currah
Affiliation:
National Vegetable Research Station, Wellesbourne, Warwick, CV35 9EF
Jane R. Fellows
Affiliation:
National Vegetable Research Station, Wellesbourne, Warwick, CV35 9EF
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Three experiments were carried out over a 2-year period to study the effect of plant density and spatial arrangement and the time of lifting on yield and root size of carrots. Plant density treatments ranged from 108 to 1553 plants/m2 and plant arrangement was varied by growing the plants in 1-, 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, 10-, 18- and 36-row systems within a 152 cm bed; there were either two or three harvests in each experiment.

Total plant fresh weight, total root yield and mean root weight were not significantly affected by plant arrangement over the range studied, but they all progressively increased with later harvests. The asymptotic relationships between these yield variables and plant density were adequately described by the equation of Shinozaki & Kira (1956), the relationships being significantly different for each harvest.

Yields of canning-size roots (20–30 mm diameter) were influenced by time of harvest, plant density and the interactions between these two variables. The yield of canning-size roots increased with plant density to a maximum and then declined, the maximum yield being achieved at a higher density with later harvests. In two out of the three experiments there was no effect of spatial arrangement on canning root yields but in the third experiment there was a significant row system × density × harvest interaction.

The numbers of roots harvested per metre of row did not differ significantly between the ‘outer’ and ‘other’ rows for any row system treatment. The mean root weight, however, was consistently greater from the outer rows of systems with three or more rows and this ‘edge’ effect became larger with later harvests.

The results are discussed in relation to other published data and to carrot production. It is concluded that any of the tested row systems are equally satisfactory for carrot production and the choice can be based on such considerations as the availability of suitable harvesting equipment.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 94 , Issue 2 , April 1980 , pp. 465 - 478
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1980

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Barnes, A. (1979 a). Vegetable plant part relationships. II. A quantitative hypothesis for shoot/storage root development. Annals of Botany 43, 487–499.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barnes, A. (1979 b). Vegetable plant part relationships. IV. An interpretation of growth regulator experiments with root crops. Annals of Botany 43, 513–522.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bleasdale, J. K. A. (1960). Competition studies. National Vegetable Research Station Annual Report for 1959, p. 26.Google Scholar
Bleasdale, J. K. A. (1963). The bed-system of carrot growing. Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food Short Term Leaflet, no. 27.Google Scholar
Bleasdale, J. K. A. (1967). Systematic designs for spacing experiments. Experimental Agriculture 3, 73–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bleasdale, J. K. A. (1973). Control of size and yield in relation to harvest date of carrot crops. Acta Horliculturae 27, 134–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bleasdale, J. K. A. & Nelder, J. A. (1960). Plant population and crop yield. Nature (London) 188, 342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bussell, W. T. (1973). Effects of plant density and time of harvest on yield of small finger carrots. New Zealand Journal of Experimental Agriculture 1, 69–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bussell, W. T. (1978). Studies on baby carrot production. New Zealand Journal of Experimental Agriculture 6, 131–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Currah, I. E. (1978 a). Plant size variation in crops. National Vegetable Research Station Annual Report for 1977, pp. 60–61.Google Scholar
Currah, I. E. (1978 b). Plant uniformity at harvest related to variation between emerging seedlings. Acta Horticulturae 72, 57–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Currah, I. E. & Barnes, A. (1979). Vegetable plant part relationships. I. Effects of time and population density on the shoot and storage root weights of carrot (Daucus carota L.). Annals of Botany 43, 475–486.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Currah, I. E. & Thomas, T. H. (1979). Vegetable plant part relationships. III. Modification of carrot (Daucus carota L.) root and shoot weights by gibberellic acid and daminozide. Annals of Botany 43, 501–511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
D'Agostino, R. B. (1970). Transformation to normality of the null distribution of g1. Biometrika 57, 679–681.Google Scholar
Dowker, B. D. (1978). Genetic variation in seedling establishment and subsequent root size variation in carrots. Acta Horticulturae 72, 49–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Franken, A. A., Snoek, N. J. & Welles, A. G. (1971). The grading and quality of carrots with differing quantities of seed at different harvest dates. Mededeling, Proefstation voor de Groenteteelt in de vollegrond in Nederland, no. 52, 1–40.Google Scholar
Kepka, K., Umiecka, L. & Fajowska, H. (1978). The influence of row spacing and plant density in rows on the yield of carrots and root quality. Acta Horticulturae 72, 217–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kira, T., Ogawa, H., Hozumi, K., Koyama, H. & Yoda, K. (1956). Intraspecific competition among higher plants. V. Supplementary notes on the C–D effect. Journal of the Institute of Polytechnics, Osaka City University, Series D 7, 1–14.Google Scholar
Koyama, H. & Kira, T. (1956). Intraspecific competition among higher plants. VIII. Frequency distribution of individual plant weight as affected by the interaction between plants. Journal of the Institute of Polytechnics, Osaka City University, Series D 7, 73–94.Google Scholar
Meteorological Office (1946). Tables for the evaluation of daily values of accumulated temperature above and below 42 °F from daily values of maximum and minimum temperatures. Leaflet No. 10. London: H.M.S.O.Google Scholar
Nelder, J. A. (1966). Inverse polynomials, a usefu group of multi-factor response functions. Biometrics 22, 128–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Øyjord, E. (1963). A universal experimental seed drill. Journal of Agricultural Engineering Research 8, 85–87.Google Scholar
Robinson, F. E. (1969). Carrot population density and yield in an arid environment. Agronomy Journal 61, 499–500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rubens, T. G. (1969). Growing carrots in wide scatterbands for the production of roots of canning size; growing carrots in narrow bands for the produotion of roots of canning size. Edinburgh and East of Scotland College of Agriculture Report of Horticultural Experiments for 1968, pp. 12–16, 17–20.Google Scholar
Salter, P. J., Currah, I. E. & Fellows, J. R. (1979). The effects of plant density, spatial arrangement and time of harvest on yield and root size in carrots. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 93, 431–440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shinozaki, K. & Kira, T. (1956). Intraspecific competition among higher plants. VII. Logistic theory of the C–D effect. Journal of the Institute of Polytechnics, Osaka City University, Series D 7, 35–72.Google Scholar
Stanhill, G. (1977 a). Allometric growth studies of the carrot crop. I. Effects of plant development and cultivar. Annals of Botany 41, 533–540.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stanhill, G. (1977 b). Allometric growth studies of the carrot crop. II. Effects of cultural practices and climatic environment. Annals of Botany 41, 541–552.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thompson, R. (1969). Carrots for canning. Scottish Horticultural Research Institute Bulletin no. 2, 1–7.Google Scholar
Thompson, R. (1972). ‘Mini-carrots’. Scottish Agriculture 51, 308–312.Google Scholar
Thompson, R. (1976). The agronomic problems of growing vegetables for specific outlets. Scottish Horticultural Research Institute Bulletin no. 11, 17–23.Google Scholar